Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
parker, thank you. i want to talk to you some more. we'll go back to the fiscal cliff. if high end tax rates are successful entrepreneurs rocket higher, you can bet the number of millionaires in this country is going south. that's if high taxes go up. millionaires go down. that's no good. in our land of opportunity, i want more millionaires. and i think the better for them and the economy. robert frank will join us with some very arresting numbers. high tax, fewer millionaires. not good. two years ago, the people of bp made a commitment to the gulf. bp has paid over twenty-three billion dollars to help those affected and to cover cleanup costs. today, the beaches and gulf are open, and many areas are reporting their best tourism seasons in years. and bp's also committed to america. we support nearly 250,000 jobs and invest more here than anywhere else. we're working to fuel america for generations to come. our commitment has never been stronger. >>> 28 days until the country plummets off the tax and fiscal cliff. big tax hikes could be coming for everyone but we see also a drastic redu
over the fiscal cliff in order to raise a tax rate to 39.6%. does that make any sense to you? are you shocked, surprised? >> well, i guess i'm not surprised given we're in the early stages of the discussion, but for the economists and forecasters out there calling this is the fiscal slope, not a cliff or believe it's worthwhile to go over the cliff, it's not the case. it is, without a doubt, a cliff. it's $600 billion. the economy cannot withstand that shock. it's slowing in anticipation. lou: $600 billion in taxes? >> spending reductions and tax increases. the economy can't handle that. without a doubt, head into recession if we're over the cliff. lou: now, are you in agreement? >> i am, carl's absolutely right, nevertheless, the markets have effectively been yawning. equity markets, go higher, corporate credit market improves, commodity prices rising, and the ten-year treasury yield is dipping to new lows. i can't figure this out. everybody seems to -- lou: i know -- >> they are in a mood, and that worries me. somebody has to be wrong, and big time. >> yawning until they don't. that
. >> with no breakthrough today, fiscal cliff negotiations, could this be a starting point? "outfront" republican congressman james lankford of oklahoma, incoming chairman of the republican policy committee, the fifth ranking position in the house gop leadership. appreciate you're taking the time. what about this idea of racinin taxes on everyone? the math works much better. >> i heard your lead in when you said this is a new idea. actually, it's not a new idea, there are several democrats who have floated that for a while. the code word is we want to go back to the clinton tax rates and talk about the clinton economy that we had a much more vigorous economy and growth and we should go back to the clinton tax rates. what that really means is all tax rates on all americans go back up because the tax rates were brought down in 2001 and 2003. i don't support that. i don't think that's a great idea. it would slow down the economy. >> when you look at economist's evaluations, it would slouw dow the economy. it would. there's no question about it. but if the problem is that we have a lot of debt and th
prepared to go over the fiscal cliff? >> oh, absolutely. again, there's no prospect to an agreement that doesn't involve those rates going up on the top 2% of the wealthiest americans -- remember, it's only 2%. the size of the problem in some sense is so large, it can't be solved without rates going up as part of that. again, i think there's broad recognition of that reality now. >> one fallback option republicans are reportedly considering is to accept tax cuts for the middle class, allow rates to go up for the wealthiest, and then start the fight over again during debt limit talks early next year. yesterday at a business roundtable of ceos, president obama took a hard line, warning his opponents not to consider this strategy. >> if congress in any way suggests that they're going to tie negotiations to dell creting votes and take us to the brink of default once again as part of a budget negotiation, which, by the way, we have never done in our history until we did it last year, i will not play that game. >> well, i wonder, the president's saying, steve, that, you know what, we can
, going off the so-called fiscal cliff means a tax hike for just about everybody who does have a job. treasury secretary timothy geithner said the president is absolutely welling to go off the cliff unless republicans agree to raise tax rates. >> there is no prospect for an agreement that doesn't involve those rates going up on the top 2% of the wealthiest. only 2%. >> reporter: on that no progress. >> where are the specifics? where are the discussions? nothing is going on. >> reporter: there have been no real talks between the white house and republicans for a week, but they say one sign of progress, the president and the speaker of the house spoke via telephone. neither side would give any details about what was said. the stock market closed higher with traders optimistic a deal will be reached. jonathan karl, abc news, washington. >> amazing a phone call can calm the markets. impressive here. what i thought was interesting. we talked how the house is scheduled to go on vacation the 14th of the month. so actually there is a tighter deadline than the 31st. apparently, house majority
he said, listen. >> if is the administration prepared too go over the fiscal cliff. >> absolutely. there is no prospect to an agreement that doesn't involve those rates going up on the top 2% of the wealthist, remember it's only 2%. >> he did not blink. that is the treasury secretary. do they talk like that? >> it's really unique. this treasury secretary is very loyal to this president, treasury secretaries are, but he is saying essentially that the tax rates going up are essential, that the money is not essential, that the dollar figure is not essential, that the rates going up are essential, and that's just interesting. going over the cliff comes with a lot of -- a lot of things that could affect the economy and the treasury secretary knows that. bill: 10% unemployment. tax rates for everybody going higher. what are you hearing on the house side? among the house republicans, whether or not they are behind the speaker, whether they are pulling away from him, where does that stand do you believe? >> reporter: you know, there are some on the house side that have a lot of concerns a
republicans are not going to have to vote for them to go up. we'll go off the fiscal cliff, down the fiscal slope. yes i think it will happen because it is the one way republicans can, without violating the pledge, and offending the grand inquisitor grover norquist, it's the one way they can let this happen. >> and, in fact, you know, what could happen, you can imagine a scenario where you go off the cliff on taxes, rates go up for everybody, you then vote to restore the rates for the vast majority of taxpayers, 98%, and further it is even conceivable you negotiate down the top rates in the level under bill clinton a little bit by putting in the pot offsetting deductions for credits which would allow republicans to claim some sort of victory as well. that could be a scenario where you have a consensus on the tax run. >> let's run all of this by representative xavier becerra of california. he's joining us now. nice to see you, sir 367 appreciate your time. what is really the white house dismiss kind of out of hand i mean i don't have the exact number of minutes that they had this republican
the road. not that far down the road but get into 2013, get the fiscal cliff thing behind us. why? >> i think tom coburn and the president have slightly different reasons for it. but the problem with just doing tax reform when you don't have the rates going back up is that these deductions and credits that we're going to have to go after to reform, they primarily benefit people at the top. but they also benefit middle-class families. and if you just change those then what you end up doing is raising taxes on middle-class families as well. to get the same amount of revenue. in other words, if you're trying to get a revenue target, let's say $1.6 trillion which is what the president wants. you try to do that just by reforming the code, without the rates. you don't touch the rates. the only way to do it is to get the money out of the middle class. the president doesn't want to do that and most people don't want to do that. but if you let the rates go back up, you're basically halfway to your revenue target and you can
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)